4.7 Article

Effect of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose (HPMC) on the release profiles and bioavailability of a poorly water-soluble drug from tablets prepared using macrogol and HPMC

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
卷 202, 期 1-2, 页码 173-178

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-5173(00)00426-9

关键词

hydroxypropylmethylcellulose; macrogol 6000; sustained release tablet; nifedipine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose (HPMC-2208), used as an excipient for controlled release of drug, on the release profiles and bioavailability of the poorly water-soluble nifedipine (NP) from a tablet prepared using macrogol 6000 (PEG) and HPMC. The crushing tolerance of the NP tablet prepared using PEG and HPMC (NP-PEG-HPMC tablet) was markedly increased with increasing compression force used during the preparation from 20 to 200 MPa. The values reached their maximal levels (approximately 13 kg for the NP-PEG-HPMC tablet and 8 kg for the PEG tablet) at the compression force of 100 MPa. Although NP is a poorly water-soluble drug, it was rapidly dissolved from the NP-PEG tablet (without HPMC) due to the improvement of its dissolution rate in the presence of PEG. NP dissolution was complete at the latest within 1 h. On the other hand, dissolution of NP from the NP-PEG-HPMC tablet was significantly delayed with an increase in the concentration of HPMC in the tablet. The dissolution of NP from the NP-PEG-HPMC tablet containing 50% HPMC-2208 was markedly delayed as the viscosity of HPMC also increased. Interestingly, the same peak plasma NP concentration (C-max) and the area under the plasma NP concentration-time curve (AUC(0) (10)) were observed for both the NP-PEG tablet and NP-PEG-HPMC tablets, however, the time to C-max (t(max)) for the NP-PEG-HPMC tablet was significantly higher when the NP-PEG-HPMC tablet using a mixture of NP-PEG granules (prepared with PEG) and HPMC. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据